I want to build a new PC for FSX and my plan is to have 3-6 monitors (initially 3, but then have another 3 on top ), can a 480 GTX support this? I know ATI eyefinity can do this, but I would like to know where 480 is as far as multiple monitors are concerned. I would get the triple head 2 go but its limitation on the resolution is a huge problem. In fact I wonder why anyone with a 1920x1200 monitor (x3) would buy it given that it downgrades your resolution.The problem with ATI is obviously the micro stutters. I don't want to spend $3-4,000 on a PC just to have my video card ruin my flight because well lets be honest, FSX is an nvidia friendly game. If someone has a solution for the ATI problems, please let me know, then I won't bother with 480 GTX. To be frankly honest, I don't see the point of 480 or 5870 or 5970 for FSX. After 280 (or even 8800 Ultra), I hardly think there is any FPS gain. But that's not why I want to buy a monster video card (FPS), my problem is mutliple monitors.Also, I will be using TrackIR, so I want the whole screen to be 1 view, for virtual cockpit. I don't like 2D panels, so docking is not an option for me (I mean it's pretty obvious from the title of the thread but just wanted to make sure).Thanks.

AFAIKGTX480 or any newer Nvidia card will soon support triple wide screen display when some new driver comeout BUT...you need two cards in SLI AND there are alot of variables still to be figured as this hasn't even hit the street yet. For example how will FSX do with the SLI.I had a GTX 480 in my triple head rig, but I kept crashing BSOD when I was using BP=0 at 5040, so now I am simply using a GTX 285 2gb which runs okay. I still have problems with heavy weather, and I can't use the REX weather engine(it uses too many clouds), but it's a pretty nice and fluid set-up with 3- fps over photscenery and 20 -24 over Orbx with high settings, 4xS AA, Trilinear filtering, etc...

GTX 4xx series cards don't have 3 active display adapters, so there isn't a driver update in the world that can address this issue. You need 2 or more cards to run more than 2 displays with GTX 4xx.

GTX 4xx series cards don't have 3 active display adapters, so there isn't a driver update in the world that can address this issue. You need 2 or more cards to run more than 2 displays with GTX 4xx.

Yeah I said that:"you need two cards in SLI " The ability to do so in triple wide screen is not yet available, hence the need for a driver update.

I want to build a new PC for FSX and my plan is to have 3-6 monitors (initially 3, but then have another 3 on top ), can a 480 GTX support this? I know ATI eyefinity can do this, but I would like to know where 480 is as far as multiple monitors are concerned. I would get the triple head 2 go but its limitation on the resolution is a huge problem. In fact I wonder why anyone with a 1920x1200 monitor (x3) would buy it given that it downgrades your resolution.The problem with ATI is obviously the micro stutters. I don't want to spend $3-4,000 on a PC just to have my video card ruin my flight because well lets be honest, FSX is an nvidia friendly game. If someone has a solution for the ATI problems, please let me know, then I won't bother with 480 GTX. To be frankly honest, I don't see the point of 480 or 5870 or 5970 for FSX. After 280 (or even 8800 Ultra), I hardly think there is any FPS gain. But that's not why I want to buy a monster video card (FPS), my problem is mutliple monitors.Also, I will be using TrackIR, so I want the whole screen to be 1 view, for virtual cockpit. I don't like 2D panels, so docking is not an option for me (I mean it's pretty obvious from the title of the thread but just wanted to make sure).Thanks.

Your title refers to "3+Views". However Virtual cockpit displays only a single view fwd- which, of course, can be zoomed out or panned automatically via TrackIR. If you zoom out to max. 0.31 you get a view that is increased from default 45

Thanks for your responses, I really appreciate everyone's time for me. I guess there is simply no point of buying a GTX 480 then? There is no way I will get SLI, I think it's by far the worst piece of garbage PC world has ever known, the worst marketing campaign there is. It's something I will never do. I'd rather spend $1,400 and get a 737 yoke than spend $1000+ for 2 video cards. Not to mention the heat, the power, the big case, the motherboard, and a dozen other problems which come with the setup.That being said, I am also seeing these "tearing" issues with the ATI cards? What does that mean? How can there be tearing problem in such an advanced card? Isn't there vsync? Is the tearing only problem for the dual GPU cards?As for the VC and the 2D panels, I'm sorry but I really feel strongly against the use of 2D panels. I think, and I will probably not be very popular for saying this, after FSX, there is no point for using 2D panels. I think the VC is truly what the simulation is about. 2D panels are far more easier since you don't have to really - well - maintain your view and perspective to your surroundings. You can sit there eating whilst clicking your mouse and you can land an MD-11 with 1 engine in a storm if you wanted to. Try the VC on the other hand and things get very challenging which I really love. The whole point of my 3 or 6 screen idea is VC really. I haven't used 2D views since 2002 or 2000 - I can't remember which one had the VC first and it's something I will never use. In fact, I am all for PMDG and other big developers to remove 2D all together. I think there are many old timers who can't leave their comfort zone which cause most of these addons to be released at least 3-6 months late - assuming everyone puts equally effort into their 2D panels as PMDG does.Anyways, does anyone use ATI's eyefinity for FSX? I know it also supports 6 displays. Do you guys suggest 6 x 19" views or 3 x 26" displays? Is it tough to have 2 rows of monitors, would the top row be too high?Thanks,

----------------------As for the VC and the 2D panels, I'm sorry but I really feel strongly against the use of 2D panels. I think, and I will probably not be very popular for saying this, after FSX, there is no point for using 2D panels. I think the VC is truly what the simulation is about. 2D panels are far more easier since you don't have to really - well - maintain your view and perspective to your surroundings. You can sit there eating whilst clicking your mouse and you can land an MD-11 with 1 engine in a storm if you wanted to. Try the VC on the other hand and things get very challenging which I really love. The whole point of my 3 or 6 screen idea is VC really. I haven't used 2D views since 2002 or 2000 - I can't remember which one had the VC first and it's something I will never use. In fact, I am all for PMDG and other big developers to remove 2D all together. I think there are many old timers who can't leave their comfort zone which cause most of these addons to be released at least 3-6 months late - assuming everyone puts equally effort into their 2D panels as PMDG does.----------------------

Myatan- There are many who disagree regarding the merits of 2D panels. "Virtual", using panning and zooming, was a scheme developed many years ago to get around the dimensional limitations of a single small monitor. At the time, 17" monitors were seen as big and 19"s were a rarity. Dual monitors were unknown - and all were CRTs.With the advent of "linking and synching" 2 or more monitors to create a single very wide desktop, the need faded for panning and zooming in a virtual FS panel. Much more panel detail could be displayed- all visible ALL THE TIME. Developments such as Eyefinity may well sound the deathknell for virtual.There is also some remarkable visual performance gain with properly unified multiple monitors.What is still missing is for developers to create panels that take advantage of the very wide "real estate" that is available with multiple monitors. Hopefully the arrival of video card systems designed for multiple monitors will encourage FS developers in this direction.As well as frameless and curved monitors- which are here now- just expensive at the moment.It is interesting to note that Jim Rhoads- principal in the Flight One software house has been quoted here in AVSIM-"As long as I am leading our products they will have both 2D and VC." Apr 25/09"I love 2D panels, I despise VCs". Nov 27/09Jim is also a real world pilot.The attached pic gives a rough idea of what the future may hold.Alex ReidExtreme King Air Turning Final for CYYJ R09- upper right of the left monitor.

I don't think you are understanding me, or I'm not understanding you. I will keep it simple.I have been using VC for a long time now. I don't remember, ever, using "zoom" extensively in any one of my flights. What you are talking about sounds like you never tried TrackIR (without VC doesn't seem possible to me) and when you did, you probably tried it on a rather small resolution. Obviously, for someone without the necessary hardware, looking around in VC is a nightmare, which is what the most old-timers suffer from, including veteran real time pilots with rather old systems.Again, without going off topic, my point for using VC is, the "real" feeling from looking around using TrackIR in MD-11 or MD-83, looking up and down, leaning forwards, left, right, or simply looking up and down as if you were in the real cockpit can not be replaced by pictures of the sections of cockpit engineered in photoshop. I know they look good, I also know it's far more easier and comfortable to use them, but guess what, again - in my opinion, good things don't come easy. The challange of using trackir in a VC gives more enjoyment than leaning back and flipping between 2D panels and clicking switches on them.I know they will always have 2D panels in payware planes, I wish they didn't, but they will. For the same reason why there are still companies creating FS9 addons or why windows XP was being sold years after it was supposed to be removed from the shelves. It's very hard to convince people to move forward with these types of things. When someone gets used to something, they never want to give up their routine and comfort zone, and really learn new things. Oh well I don't think there is any point of arguing, it's a matter of difference of opinion.

The attached pic gives a rough idea of what the future may hold.

God I hope not...While you mention some may be going to 2D, a large portion of developers are only including VC with only a few panels that display 2D. Alex, please try to stay on topic as it seems you have a hard time letting an opportunity go to try to convert people to your 2D ideology. His question is about getting a view on 3 monitors using one card, not about finding comfort in 2D panels. :(

God I hope not...While you mention some may be going to 2D, a large portion of developers are only including VC with only a few panels that display 2D. Alex, please try to stay on topic as it seems you have a hard time letting an opportunity go to try to convert people to your 2D ideology. His question is about getting a view on 3 monitors using one card, not about finding comfort in 2D panels. :(

red1- it's my understanding that the FAA will not permit VC instrument/control panels in approved Flight Training Devices. (ie panels and/or views which depend on panning or zooming to be actuated or fully viewed.) The panel, controls and any view must be fixed- ie 2D.That's why I follow the strategy of 3 fixed views (145

I hope you guys know you can create your own cameras in FSX.So you create 2 VC cameras and put those on your side monitors.A littlebit of tweaking and the three monitors look like ONE VC. There is NO NEED to go 2D.This doesn't answer the topicstarter's question; what card(s) to buy for the three (or six) monitors, with NO TH2G or Eyefinity!I myself have the same question, hope someone has a suggestion.Last thing to say is that I dont have experience with TrackIR. At home I fly with three monitors in VC but I can only activate one. So with the hud I can look around but only ONE monitor reacts. I don't know if there's a way to get around this. Nice thing with having multiple monitors off course is you don't have to look around with the hud anymore. :(

I hope you guys know you can create your own cameras in FSX.So you create 2 VC cameras and put those on your side monitors.A littlebit of tweaking and the three monitors look like ONE VC. There is NO NEED to go 2D.This doesn't answer the topicstarter's question; what card(s) to buy for the three (or six) monitors, with NO TH2G or Eyefinity!I myself have the same question, hope someone has a suggestion.Last thing to say is that I dont have experience with TrackIR. At home I fly with three monitors in VC but I can only activate one. So with the hud I can look around but only ONE monitor reacts. I don't know if there's a way to get around this. Nice thing with having multiple monitors off course is you don't have to look around with the hud anymore. :(

-----------------The OP referred to wanting 3 views but does not want 2D panels. Unfortunately, you can have only one view displayed with a virtual panel. That 45

VC is great! (But I also like 2D).So can anyone explain how to click a switch or turn a knob on a VC panel with TrackIR?I must be terribly unskilled, because the switch/knob drifts away as I approach it with the mouse (yes I know it is my head moving) so I find myself pressing "F9" to stop TrackIR, then click the switch/turn the knob with the mouse, then press "F9" again to resume TrackIR. This works but I find it extremely annoying.Any suggestions? Anyone else experiencing the same problem?Cheers,- jahman.

VC is great! (But I also like 2D).So can anyone explain how to click a switch or turn a knob on a VC panel with TrackIR?I must be terribly unskilled, because the switch/knob drifts away as I approach it with the mouse (yes I know it is my head moving) so I find myself pressing "F9" to stop TrackIR, then click the switch/turn the knob with the mouse, then press "F9" again to resume TrackIR. This works but I find it extremely annoying.Any suggestions? Anyone else experiencing the same problem?Cheers,- jahman.

You can change the sensitivity of TrackIR, so that it doesn't react to tiny head movements, check the setup software and change "smoothness" or something like that.I love track IR but not for heavies, then I will typically take my hat off and just do everything with the panning camera.

red1- it's my understanding that the FAA will not permit VC instrument/control panels in approved Flight Training Devices. (ie panels and/or views which depend on panning or zooming to be actuated or fully viewed.) The panel, controls and any view must be fixed- ie 2D.That's why I follow the strategy of 3 fixed views (145